ct8282 wrote:
Would be funny if this pic was taken with a Canon!! lol
he was shooting 1000 togs in the newspaper tog's hutch, there will sure be lot of canon shots of him. Though canonist will most likely not be bold about it.
and to the OP: nikon would most likely pay for it if it wouldnt be already spread for free everywhere. Some will never learn: if you got killer shot, think $$$$ not back patting on photographer's forum
Kittyk wrote:
he was shooting 1000 togs in the newspaper tog's hutch, there will sure be lot of canon shots of him. Though canonist will most likely not be bold about it.
and to the OP: nikon would most likely pay for it if it wouldnt be already spread for free everywhere. Some will never learn: if you got killer shot, think $$$$ not back patting on photographer's forum
That's the American dream! Maybe the photog wasn't American. lol
Yeah the reverse shot is funny. The photographer that gave him the camera to use is the only one camera less. And yeah Nikon couldn't pay enough to get this free publicity. Though if they use it an advertisement they'll have to pony up the dollars.
VinnieJ wrote:
That's the American dream! Maybe the photog wasn't American. lol
no, look at flickr and many other sites.
americans or not, photogs nowadays actually giving everybody their treasures for free.
and if a company wants something specific, they announce competition and get 1000 shots for nothing to chose from.
Sad world.
Mescalamba wrote:
I think they could pay for that.. why not.
Interesting is that it seems that he knows what hes doing...
Maybe he owns one or more Nikon cameras, or any other dSLR. So he knows what he is doing. What is interesting about that? Actually, BBC has some photos online that Bolt took with this camera.
As for Nikon paying him, I agree with you. They can However, the question is was this predetermined and a publicity ploy by Nikon or was it just something Bolt did at the spur of the moment?
